ArticleClinical kidney journal2021
Feasibility of evaluation of the natural history of kidney disease in the general population using electronic healthcare records.
Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identification of patients undergoing chronic kidney replacement therapy in primary and secondary care data: validation study based on OpenSAFELY and UK Renal Registry.BMJ medicine · 2024Article
- Routine Clinical Care Creatinine Data in Denmark - An Epidemiological Resource for Nationwide Population-Based Studies of Kidney Disease.Clinical epidemiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundKnowledge about the nature of long-term changes in kidney function in the general population is sparse. We aim to identify whether primary care electronic healthcare records capture sufficient information to study the natural history of kidney disease.
methodsThe National Chronic Kidney Disease Audit database covers ∼14% of the population of England and Wales. Availability of repeat serum creatinine tests was evaluated by risk factors for chronic kidney disease (CKD) and individual changes over time in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were estimated using linear regression. Sensitivity of estimation to method of evaluation of eGFR compared laboratory-reported eGFR and recalculated eGFR (using laboratory-reported creatinine), to uncover any impact of historical creatinine calibration issues on slope estimation.
resultsTwenty-five per cent of all adults, 92% of diabetics and 96% of those with confirmed CKD had at least three creatinine tests, spanning a median of 5.7 years, 6.2 years and 6.1 years, respectively. Median changes in laboratory-reported eGFR (mL/min/1.73 m
conclusionsEvaluation of long-term changes in renal function will be possible in those at greatest risk if methods are identified to overcome creatinine calibration problems. Bias will be reduced by focussing on patients with confirmed CKD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.